Vehicle tracks, mountain biking tracks, cycle trails, foot-tracks and tramping routes. To: recreational users of NZ Topo50 mapping (printed and digital). If you agree that New Zealand’s Topo50 maps need a wider range of track symbols, please sign the electronic petition at: https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/petitions/document/PET_97833/petition-of-pete-mcdonald-ask-linz-and-nzwac-to-redesign Please share this message widely among track-users. The petition will be open for signing until 31 December 2020. Thank you. petemcd
11–19 of 19
If were looking for make work projects right now - I'd also like them marked. The startpoints from roads anyway - with a standardised simple sign. A minimum of a 100x100 icon of someone walking, either set into a low (~500mm high) post or as a direction arrow attached to a standard signpost.
This list of four points, if subjected to examination and if strengthened accordingly, might be a useful contribution to any submission that a select committee might request from me sometime next year (if my petition succeeds). Has anyone got the time to take ownership of this PROPOSED NZ RED TRACKS list for the next six months, adding any necessary detail, until it is as solid as we can make it?
Huge thanks for the signatures, 149 so far. The petition will remain open until 31 December 2020. There's plenty of time for clubs and national bodies to look at the issues and, if they choose to, to put their collective weight informally behind the petition. An example of informed support, made available by permission, is at: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ryuc1ap6aagdgwo/KaumatuaNewsletter.docx?dl=0 A recent one-page example of why walkers and off-road cyclists need better maps is available at: https://www.dropbox.com/s/t9wrv4b2p4xlrep/2020JunRacemans.pdf?dl=0
Should unformed legal roads across any land be included in that list, or are they something different?
IMHO. Regarding whether LINZ should show unformed paper roads on LINZ maps: Probably not (and this is a change of stance for me from where I'd have been 10 years back). Unformed legal roads with no defined tracks on them are certainly public land with a right of public access, but unless they coincide with formed tracks they should not be shown as tracks. They should be mapped as such: on land ownership and public access land mapping like WAMS they should certainly be shown as 'public'. But until a track is defined & marked across them they are 'public land' but not 'public tracks' and I think they would clutter and introduce confusion if they were shown as tracks on LINZ maps. Walking Access Commission should be responsible for getting these paper roads surveyed and marked out on the ground where they provide useful/necessary access (e.g. to parks, beaches, waterways or waling routes between formed roads). And then yes - once they've been surveyed and marked they should be on the LINZ map. Others' thoughts?
"IMHO. Regarding should LINZ show unformed paper roads on LINZ maps:" I would of thought LINZ maps shoud show them but only on the topo if there is a track etc actually there. It gets complicated when paper roads go through National parks. Is the Milford Road part of the Fiordland National Park? If it was you wouldnt be allowed to drive it. Same would be the case with any paper road in and other park. As a 4wder I would love to drive the paper road that the Heaphy follows but I know to do so would cause a lot of trouble and damage so It will never happen but that does not mean that even though I can never exercise that right it should be hidden from me
Paper roads do not 'go through' national parks or conservation land as-such. They are separate titles separate from the neighbouring conservation land, vested in linz rather than doc. Same as they are not part of the farms they are neighbours of. So you can drive your cattle or walk your dog on the Milford or Haast highways so long as you do not stray into neighbouring parkland. Agree geeves. Topos should show public formed tracks. But WAMS should show all public land. But for your specific example the legal road that formerly existed along the heaphy was expunged by the act creating the national park.
The list of four track types (Post 10) might need expanding to specifically state the different legal instruments behind the phrases 'public land' or 'crown land'. During the walking access discussions of 2003–2008, government reports sometimes referred to the eight reservations that make up the Queen's Chain (ie the incomplete Queen's Chain). They are public roads (also called legal roads); marginal strips; ambulatory marginal strips; public reserves along water; esplanade reserves of various types; recreation reserves; esplanade strips; and Maori reservations. The vehicle tracks and foot-tracks shown on NZ Topo50 and on the online Track and Trails map are those that are physically evident, either on the surface of the ground or by adequate permanent waymarking. An unformed legal road that is completely invisible on the ground is not a physically evident track, and so it would not be shown on the topographical map (except in unusual circumstances). Similarly, instances of the other seven reservations without any evident or waymarked tracks would probably not be shown. Conversely, physically evident tracks based on any of the eight reservations are prime candidates for being shown on the topographic maps as open to the public. Another of the complications of this topic is tracks on local-authority land, typically water catchments. The Local Government Geospatial Alliance (LGGA) is building the NZ Walking and Biking Tracks database, which provides the NZWAC with some of the tracks data for the Tracks and Trails map. The NZ Walking and Biking Tracks database was last updated in 2016. I don't know what's happening with this. The NZWAC has recently had its funding doubled, so maybe work on this database will restart. One of the issues that complicates the collection of authoritative data on tracks is the occasional discrepancies between theoretical track locations on cadastral plans and actual track locations on the ground. I have a list of questions on my desk, one of which is: what steps are being taken to eliminate these misalignments?
Reminder: the petition on track symbols remains open until 31 December 2020.Thanks to all the people who have signed it. While stuck at home for three months I wrote a short paper providing some background to the petition. Collectively the issues behind the petition amount to quite an involved story that few people have the time to study in depth. In the simplest terms, however, the petition is about obtaining more modern and improved topographic maps (printed and digital) for all track users, nationally. 16 pages, A4, available from: https://petemcdonald.co/onestep.pdf
Search the forums
Formatting your posts
The forums support MarkDown syntax. Following is a quick reference.
|Type this...||To get this...|
|Italic||*Italic text*||*Italic text*|
|Bold||**Bold text**||**Bold text**|
|Quoted text||> Quoted text||> Quoted text|
|Emojis||:smile: :+1: :astonished: :heart:||:smile: :+1:
- item 1
- item 2
- item 3
|- item 1 - item 2 - item 3|